Jehovah's Witnesses [Archive] - Christian Guitar Forum

matth

11-04-2001, 07:33 PM

Our youth group talked about this this morning to know what they believe and that stuff.

They believe in a New World Translation of the Bible-i think thats what its called. it's a modified version to meet what they believe. they believe in no Trinity. they believe that Jesus was perfect and His death but no actual resorection. they believe that Jesus was perfect, but not God. which, i guess in their ways, would make Jesus' "level" on the todem pole reachable because He was just perfect and not God. They believe in Jehovah as God, which i guess would be our God yeah.

They dont' say the pledge of aliegence as someones said. they dont say national anthem. no blood transfusions, because the blood i think they believe may contain their spirit. they're VERY out there to spread them message. many hours spent a week for the people.

Salvation-wise. They believe only a limited number of people cant enter heaven. The good good people that spread their religion and that stuff get in, i believe if i am not mistaken. They also believe they know when Jesus is coming back. which dates that they thought he was coming back have passed many times. this is all i can think of right now. hope this helps and i am pretty sure this is right, correct me if i am wrong.

-matt

mindsize93

11-04-2001, 08:08 PM

Just a note to matth's post, They don't believe that he was just a perfect human. They believe he is the Son of God, but that he is not equal to God. He was created by God before anything else (angels, humans, Etc) and was given divine powers to create the universe, but is still second in command. Basically they couldn't come up with a way to deny He was the Son of God, but this way they can deny the trinity which is a common theme among cults. also I don't think anyone has mentioned this, but they don't believe in Hell just soul sleep.

Jeffro-Wilson

11-05-2001, 05:19 PM

actually, they believe in anhilation, which means you cease to exist, which if you think about it is probably way more fun than people deserve

Unregistered

11-06-2001, 04:21 PM

here's a thread for y'all

http://www.christianguitar.ws/boards/showthread.php?threadid=5993

Chrysostom

11-06-2001, 04:49 PM

Sorry Travis; i didn't notice this!
Originally posted by pleasurespain
Interesting, why not?i do not say the Pledge of Allegiance because i don't agree with it

"i pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

i bolded the parts i don't agree with. i don't want to pledge myself to anything other than God.

Travis

11-06-2001, 05:09 PM

I kind of see what you mean. Thanks :)

Chrysostom

11-06-2001, 05:11 PM

psalm10730

11-08-2001, 07:14 PM

Just a general question to yall: How do you get information on Jehovah's witnesses and stuff? I mean all I know of them is that they knock on doors and they don't believe in the Trinity.

Bryan

11-18-2001, 10:35 PM

From what I have heard, and correct me if I am wrong, beleive that only 144000 will go to heaven. But they have had to change that because they're membership has grown greater than 144000.

Chrysostom

11-19-2001, 03:58 PM

Bryan---LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!

SCCdcTFreak

11-23-2001, 09:32 AM

I just started a book the other day called "The Top 10 Things You Can Say to a Jehovah's Witness." I've only read the intro, but it seems a like a really good book. We had the guy that wrote it on one of our shows last weeks, and he really knows his stuff. I got a free copy of the book from one of our producers, so after reading it, I'll let y'all know how it is. But here's some of the stuff I already know.

I know that some of their beliefs are that they also don't join the military because they believe the Bible teaches not to go to war, and they use the excuse that the OT stories of war are because they're specific cases where God told them to go to war.

And about the 144,000 -- I could be wrong, but I think they believe that there are 144,000 elect that go to like, the supreme heaven and that those 144,000 spots are already taken. But then, there's like, a secondary heaven that all Jehovah's Witnesses can go to if they live perfect after their conversion. This is where it gets kinda funny, 'cuz they also teach that you have no second chance if you mess up after your conversion and will face the "annihilation" when Christ returns next month (which seems to be their popular prediction every month), while people that are not converted to J. W. are put into an eternal resting state of some sort and then will go to like, this 3rd level of heaven. This basically states that it's easier to just not be J. W. than to become one and fail, although they'll probably try to refute that logic.

They also have a publication called the WatchTower, which is basically a group of guys interpreting the Bible wrongly through their pre-conceived ideas of J. W.-ness. They also teach that if you read the Bible on your own without reading the WatchTower, your mind will become "clouded with wrong interpretations" because you have not been properly trained to read the Bible.

I think that's about it. If I think of some more, I'll let y'all know.

In Him,
† <>< Stephen :cool:

MuchAfraid

11-23-2001, 01:53 PM

WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY (jehovah's witnesses)

started by charles taze russel. 1879, started the Watchtower magazine. in 1884, he founded and made himself president of ZION'S WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY and later added WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, INC.

Russel claimed to be a biblical scholar, but recieved no training. he was divorced and charged with perjury (claimed he knew greek, but did not.) Russel died in 1916

Jehovah's witnesses proclaimed the end would come and armageddon would occur in 1918, 1925, and 1933.

New president Nathan Homer Knorr published the witnesses bible THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION in portions in 1950.

The beliefs:

jesus is not god: they said he was michael the archangel. He did not raise form the dead, but according to them, returned to earth 1914 INVISIBLY.(lol all day long)

saved by what you do: can lose salvation. only 144,000 will go to heaven, but the rest of the Jehovah's Witnesses will remain in earthly paradise. all other infidels will be annihilated.

do not slaute flag or celebrate birthdays, do not have blood transfusions, or celbrate christmas.

they also believe that grace does not involve a free gift of salvation.

the supposed 144,000 confirmed are believed to be all male, all jewish, and all virgins(yeah right)

if oyu need to know more, email me at roarinlamb@hotmail.com

dave

JerryLove

11-23-2001, 02:32 PM

They sound a lot like seven day adventists.

victor

11-23-2001, 04:35 PM

My pasture has a thing that show how to witness to jehovah's witnesses. its realy cool.

cory

guitarman

11-23-2001, 04:38 PM

From what I have heard, and correct me if I am wrong, beleive that only 144000 will go to heaven. But they have had to change that because they're membership has grown greater than 144000.
I thought that this was changed to 144 million now?

Aaron

Phil

12-01-2001, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by guitarman

I thought that this was changed to 144 million now?

Aaron I dont think so.... they get the 144,000 from Revelation.

Luke

12-01-2001, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by guitarman
I thought that this was changed to 144 million now?

I heard that somewhere recently. Apparently they could somehow justify the idea of only 144,000,000 real Christians even though 144,000 was obviously too absurdly little.

Superman

12-01-2001, 09:35 PM

I once had a JH talk to me. I cut him off and asked "Hey, dont you guys believe only 144,000 will be saved?

"Yes"

"Well then aren't you afraid if you convert me, I may take your spot?"

Then I slammed the door.

LOL

:D

Luke

12-01-2001, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Superman
Then I slammed the door.

It might be a tat more useful to attempt to convert them.

Superman

12-01-2001, 10:00 PM

Oh loosen up. Take a laxative. :rolleyes:

Phil

12-02-2001, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by Superman
Oh loosen up. Take a laxative. :rolleyes:
Wow. From someone who believes that any man can be saved and doesn't believe in predestination, I would think you would put a little more emphasis on evagelism, which is one of our main purposes in life.

Superman

12-02-2001, 07:24 PM

1. 9 times out of 10, they are so indoctrinated it would be like talking to a wall.

2. Also, if I dont feel lead to speak up, I usually dont bother.

3. I wasnt saved at the time and didnt really care. Still thought it was an amusing story. Geeezzz...

I_Believe

12-02-2001, 10:15 PM

alright..i havent read every single replies on this...
but here are a few that they do believe..

i saw one reply, that said they dont do the pledge of allegiance. they don't do that, because they feel that they are making an idol of the flag. giving too much attention to the flag, and worshipping it.

they also go door to door to evangelize. they believe that God will protect them from harm, because door to door is dangerous.

the star that the wise men saw -- they believe God didn't put it there, but Satan. Why?! because at that time, as you know, the king was killing all the babies, because One will become greater than he. Satan wanted king herod to see that star, follow it, and kill it.

they believe in a lot of other things too. some of my friends are jehovah's witnesses. ill learn more, and tell you guys

I_Believe

12-02-2001, 10:20 PM

one thing...i remember one reply, that said they use another Bible than us. I'm 99.6% sure that they use the same Bibles, as us, Christians do. You know those Good News Bibles? they use those mainly. they also use other things. it's just that they interpret the Bible a lot differently than us.

What should a Christian say to a Jehovah Witness?
treat them like you would to any other person, while your reaching out. talk about what differences there are in their beliefs and ours. it's a little harder to evangelize to those who believe in the same God, but interpret it differently, than an Atheist. Just pray for the Holy Spirit to guide your lips. Dont rush evangelism. Evangelizing is a process. And if you succeed in converting others, pray for them everyday, until the end.

Phil

12-03-2001, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by Superman
1. 9 times out of 10, they are so indoctrinated it would be like talking to a wall.

2. Also, if I dont feel lead to speak up, I usually dont bother.

3. I wasnt saved at the time and didnt really care. Still thought it was an amusing story. Geeezzz...
1. Well, you could have slammed it in the face of the other guy out of the 10.

2. That is not an excuse...

3. Fine, I can understand how it would be funny if you were not saved, but you are now (right?), so there should be no humor in laughing at the unsaved.

Phil

12-03-2001, 03:59 PM

Chrysostom

12-03-2001, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by fillup07
3. Fine, I can understand how it would be funny if you were not saved, but you are now (right?), so there should be no humor in laughing at the unsaved.There's also no humor in you being a flat-out jerk to Superman.

Phil

12-03-2001, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by mustbenothing
There's also no humor in you being a flat-out jerk to Superman. I am sorry if I came across that way. What specifically are you talking about?

MrCrabby

12-04-2001, 12:51 PM

No... I am pretty sure its a different translation that is REALLY bad. Theres other examples in this thread.
I'm not sure, it might be the same Bible.......but they only use about 2 or 3 verses out of it.

Chrysostom

12-04-2001, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by GzusPhreek2k
I'm not sure, it might be the same Bible.......but they only use about 2 or 3 verses out of it.Thei Bible is called the New World Translation. They have a vast number of verses memorized and are quite ready to use them. The problem is that they sometimes take verses out of context and, moreover, that their "translation" is not really a translation from the Greek and Hebrew at all, but instead a paraphrase from the KJV written to serve their purposes. Case in point: John 1 begins by changing "and the Word was God" to "and the word was a god."

They are always extremely nice people and very stubbornly brain-washed.

The only way to help them is love.

frostydv

12-07-2001, 01:27 PM

r. De Rosa Says They Are Not Christians
ROME, 30 JUL 1999 (ZENIT).
In an article to be published in the forthcoming issue of the Jesuit magazine, "Civiltà Cattolica," Fr. Giuseppe De Rosa contends that Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians because they have falsified Sacred Scripture. According to the article, they do not have a proper religious life and, what is perhaps worse, suffer in the organization from a kind of mental plagiarism, which leads them to break all human relations with anyone who is not part of their organization.
The author gives a number of proofs to support his statements. For example, the Witnesses cannot be classified as Christians, because they deny two dogmas without which Christianity would not exist: the Holy Trinity and Jesus' divinity, as the incarnate Son of God.
In spite of the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses call themselves the "only true Christians," for them "Jesus is not God but the first creature of God and they identify him with Michael, the Archangel," writes Fr. De Rosa.
Moreover, "they have their own Bible, which is not the Hebrew-Christian one," notes the article, and it is translated "in a way that confirms the Witnesses' doctrine," falsifying "essential things, making it say things it does not say or even say the contrary of what it says."
Moreover, the Jehovah's Witnesses do not have "religious practices or a sacramental life." Fr. De Rosa specifically notes the case of Baptism, which for the Witnesses is only an outward sign of a decision to follow Jehovah. Once a year a meeting is held to commemorate Jesus' death. The ceremony includes a solemn prayer, a hymn, a memorial of Jesus' Last Supper, and the "passing of the symbols," that is, the bread and wine, which, however, not all consume, but only those who feel they are part of the 144,000 'anointed' destined to be in heaven with Jesus, while all the other Jehovah's Witnesses will live in a kind of terrestrial paradise.
The fact that the end of the world did not come in 1874, or 1914, or 1925, or 1975 as predicted by the Witnesses, and that at present all that is said is that the date is "imminent but not specified," does not cause a crisis in the followers, is due to the "psychological hammering" to which they are subjected, according to the theologian. "This causes the destruction of what is most human in man: his ability to think autonomously, to reason and to exercise his critical capacity, his liberty."
According to Fr. De Rosa, the Jehovah of the Witnesses "is not the Father and the Friend of all men. He recognizes only the Witnesses as his own, and he has prepared the terrestrial paradise only for them. What awaits all other men is destruction and extermination." In other words, he is "a God-Exterminator of millions of people," the article concludes. ZE99073006

Steve Puersten

12-06-2002, 07:53 AM

' Just a general question to yall: How do you get information
on Jehovah's witnesses and stuff? I mean all I know of them
is that they knock on doors and they don't believe in the
Trinity.'

Several years ago, I allowed a JW to come into my home once a week because nobody could answer my questions about them and I decided to find out for myself. I found it very enlightening, and only served to drive me deeper into the true word and to really find out what I as a christian believe (you'de be surprised how many there are out there who do not). Among other things, I bought several different translations of the Bible (for comparison purposes) and found a couple of good books by christian authors disputing JW's points on a couple of different issues. One of the most helpful was written by an ex JW called 'How to Rescue a Loved one from the Watchtower' (I can't give any more detail as the book is currently on loan to my mother). Christian bookstores should have plenty of books on them.

The Jehovah's Witnesses are always glad to give you copies of any and all literature, including a copy of their Bible, special books that have been printed to defend certain points, and regular periodicals which help to clarify their thinking on a variety of christian topics. They can be very helpful in trying to establish what JWs believe.

The key issues for christians are; they do not believe in the Trinity. They argue that it is a pagan belief borrowed from other ancient cultures. Thus, Christ is not God, but God's son, a lesser God than God the Father (how's that for pagan).

They do not believe in hell. They argue that God loves us too much to torture us like that. They believe that when you die, you simply stay in the grave unless you are one of God's chosen, resurrected ones. I really annoyed one when I expressed my pleasure in the thought that I might get a chance to catch up on my sleep.

They do not believe in celebrating Christmas (pagan celebrations), Birthdays (idolatry) or pledging allegiance to a country or flag (only to God).

They believe that Jesus has already come to claim his Kingdom. There have been two or three dates in the past where the prophecies in the book of Daniel have been used to firmly establish the exact date of Christ's return only to have these dates come and go with no Jesus. Finally, they just decided that they would accept the fact that Christ has come but invisibly in heaven.

Most importantly, because they get so much opposition, they are trained very thoroughly in their Bible, and how to answer to this opposition. They are probably better prepared and more knowledgable about there beliefs than the vast majority of Christians and to be admired for their zeal in proclaiming the word (that we would all be so zealous).

You also cannot change their scriptural views by debating scripture with them because their beliefs are passed down to them from the heads of the organisation and they are taught that these people are God's chosen messengers in the world. And when they read scripture, they have been taught to automatically 'translate' per se into JWspeak.

The only way to change a JWs mind is to very gradually plant the seeds of doubt in the validity of the organisation, and there is plenty of material available to make this possible.

Hope this helps,

GOD bless,
Steve

Beth

04-05-2003, 03:10 PM

The only way to change a JWs mind is to very gradually plant the seeds of doubt in the validity of the organisation, and there is plenty of material available to make this possible.

Care to share what some of that may be?

MonkeeSage

04-05-2003, 04:08 PM

My favorite argument against JW is an internal argument from their own claim:

They claim that all the churches, except JW, are corrupted ("apostate" is their own term). They claim that all the members of these churches are also apostate.

OK, now granted that is true--that means before they joined the org they were apostate themselves.

But how did they come to know that the org was correct and everyone else was apostate?

Well, it was by the Bible, they claim.

So then, they have all kinds of problems now--they, being apostate, could find the truth from the Bible--WITHOUT THE ORG!!!

So we have an authentic dilemma here. And we can launch a two-pronged attack on the basis on this dilemma:

Either:

1. The Bible is perspicuous by itself and the org is not needed to come to the truth (even for apostates).

Or,

2. The Bible is not perspicuous by itself and they choose to join the JWs while still apostates without the truth. Thus they have no way of knowing that JW is non-apostate, because all they have are their own apostate ideas to go on.

Shelumi`El
Jordan

S.D.G

Beth

04-05-2003, 04:40 PM

Wow, that's interesting. I have an aquaintance who is JW and really doesn't understand what he believes at all - though he believes it quite strongly - he just trusts those in higher authority to tell him what the Bible says & means.

tabboy

04-07-2003, 06:32 AM

That must mean Jehovah Wittnes' are non Christian?

MonkeeSage

04-09-2003, 03:05 AM

They are not Christian. Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Christ is who He said He is.

Shelumi`El
Jordan

S.D.G

Beth

04-09-2003, 02:20 PM

yep. They say (at least this fellow does) that Jesus was the son of God, but not God incarnate. They say that he was God's first creation, even though according to John 1:1 he was there at the beginning. let me point out thought, that they believe themselves to be Christians, to be the only true Christians. They will try to convert you. Hebrews 2:1, 1 Peter 3:15-16

meatfinger

04-10-2003, 12:06 AM

Jehovah's Witnesses are definitely a non-Christian cult. If anyone desires, and if it has not already been done, I can go into great detail exposing their blasphemy and false teachings. But only if someone wants to see it, twould be time consuming. I am willing, though. :)

Beth

04-10-2003, 02:39 PM

well, if you really don't mind, I would find that very helpful.

meatfinger

04-10-2003, 10:07 PM

OK, but give me a few. I'll try to have it up sometime later tonite, but it may be tomorrow before its' done. Who knows?

meatfinger

04-10-2003, 11:45 PM

OK, here are a couple of their doctrines, the "support" they use, and firm refutations of each. I loaned my book to a friend, so this is all from memory. I'm pretty sure it's accurate though. More later.

Note: as has been stated elsewhere, the Watchtower has its own translation of the Bible: The New World Translation. It is a complete distortion of Scripture that is not based upon solid exegesis of the original texts whatsoever. As the Jehovah’s Witnesses shun higher education, none of the original translators were trained in the languages, and they have no evidence or respected scholars to back their poor translation. Thus, this can make witnessing to JW’s is very difficult.

The Deity of Christ

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was a god.” (John 1:1, NWT, emphasis mine).

That is basically what the Witnesses believe about Christ. They believe that Jehovah, the Almighty God, created Christ, his Word, as his first Creation. This makes Jesus unequal with God, only a lesser creature. Obviously this is, as Travis would say, ****able heresy. The Bible explicitly states in many places that Jesus and God are equal and united. The Watchtower’s atrocious distortion of John 1:1 is unjustified by the Greek text (complicated explanation that I don’t really understand anyways).

JWs also use Colossians 1:15 to “justify” their blasphemy. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.” (NIV) This is obviously an improper interpretation of the verse. The main jist of this verse is saying that Jesus is the single heir to all the Father’s resources (as was the norm in their culture). Basically he was saying that all the power and authority of the Father was at Jesus’ command. Now skip down a few verses to 19: “For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell..” (KJV) or, in the ESV “In Him dwelleth the fullness of the Godhead bodily”. That pretty well shoots down their claims, I would say.

Another verse used to support their claim is Philippians 2:6: “Who [Christ], being in very nature God [NWT “a god”], did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing…” (NIV). A more accurate translation of this verse would read “something to be grasped after”, such that He already had it, and had no need to grasp for it. Another solid interpretation is that it means “grasped” in the sense of “forcibly retained”. It is just that our culture has altered the meaning of “grasped” to mean “striving for” or something similar.

They also teach that Jesus never claimed to be God. This is absurd. In John 8:58, Jesus echoes the famous statement made by Jehovah in the Old Testament: “ ‘I tell you the truth’, Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!” Any good Jew would have recognized this from the Torah, and the crowd certainly did, as they prepared to stone him for blasphemy.

There are several other Biblical proofs, but I think you understand.

The Return of Christ

This is one of the more interesting doctrines of the Watchtower. First of all, they believe that Christ will return in an invisible presence, or parousia. Check this against Revelation 1:7: “Look, he [Christ] is coming in the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen.” See also Matt. 6:27.

Also, there’s always the issue of dates. Early on, they issues a statement stating the 1799 was “the beginning of the end.” Then, in the early 20th century, they stated that Armageddon would occur in 1914. When WWI broke out, Jehovah’ Witnesses everywhere rejoiced. When the world failed to cease, they were mocked incessantly. They continued to push that date back farther and farther until they finally resorted to “sometime in the near future” and said that it would occur sometime before everyone alive in 1914 died.

meatfinger

04-14-2003, 12:08 AM

Did anyone find that helpful? I need to know if I should bother doing more when I have the time.....

gchord

04-14-2003, 09:58 PM

A really good book to study this topic is the book KIngdom of the Cults by Walter Martin.He tells the whole story about the JW's and their founder. He also describes the doctrine of the JW'S,as well as other cults as well.

meatfinger

04-15-2003, 12:43 AM

That book is actually where I got the majority of my information at. An excellent resource. :yep:

tropicana

04-19-2003, 10:17 AM

When I was a new Christian (well, not really new, but not very knowlegeable), two JW's came to my door. Two nice, rather rotund ladies were there and proceeded to ask me myriad questions about whether I went to church or not, which church, and how often I went. They handed me an Awake magazine on September 11th. All the while I was silently praying or something to come up so I could get them to lave without coming across as horribly rude (it was tempting to pull a Superman and slam the door in their faces). Finally, they left. I think I was saying "um" too much, or I looked too rooted in Christianity for them to budge in an afternoon.
Six moths later, they came back. This time, my mum answered the door, and I was at a vantage where I coul hear, but not be seen. They proceeded to tell her how wonderful I was and how well I knew the Bible and how it was great that "some young people" were interested in religion. I admire my mum. She simply said "Sorry, we're not interested." and closed the door.

As has been said before, Jehovah's Witnesses have their own version of the Bible, and it is revised regularily to jibe with the newest prophecies. Many do not know what they're into until after they get into higher rankings in the cult. They do not get blood transfusions because "the life is in the blood". There have been many publicized cases of sick little children being denyed transfusions because their parents were Jehovah's Witnesses. The most recent one that I can think of occured in Alberta; a father left the cult because he wanted to be able to sign for blood transfusions for his daughter, who had leukemia. He did, but she refused the treatments, saying that she "hated him" for it. I have not heard if she died.

What I want to know is WHY don't they celebrae birthdays?

tropicana

04-19-2003, 09:17 PM

So does that mean they don't mow their lawns or go to zoos either? I don't know of any reference to a lawn-mowing or a zoo-attending verse :rolleyes:

notmyown

04-20-2003, 04:50 PM

Read "Witnesses of Jehovah" by Leonard and Majorie Chretien. You'll learn a lot about what they believe and how to refute them. Online, just visit http://www.jude3.net/JWIDX.HTM.

They also say that the reason for no birthdays is because the only two birthdays mentioned in the bible are by 'sinners' such as Herod (and one other guy). I think they might have forgotten that they were sinners. Next time a JW comes to your door, ask for some literature.

Ted Logan

04-30-2003, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Bryan
From what I have heard, and correct me if I am wrong, beleive that only 144000 will go to heaven. But they have had to change that because they're membership has grown greater than 144000.

I got bored reading all this, so if someone else has provided this information, I'm sorry. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that 144,000 will go to heaven, and the rest of the faithful JWs will live on the New Earth, which will be perfect, but it's not heaven. Non JWs (including all members of orthodox Christian churches) would be annihilated. No Hell.

When JWs have Communion, they believe that only the 144,000 are allowed to receive, so only those who believe they will be in that number take Communion. Needless to say, there are plenty of JWs who do not take Communion.

The movment we call Jehovah's Witnesses started in the late 1890s, when a man named Charles Taze Russell, as the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society. They still publish their newsletter as "Zion Watchtower", I think, even though they've changed their name to Jehovah's Witnesses. Russell was 19 when he began his journey into heresy, and continually predicted the return of Jesus on specific dates. Originally, 1874 was the year when he'd come to establish the New Heaven and New Earth. The last time a date failed, 1975, the JWs lost about 750,000 members over a four year period.

Other talking points:
-Jesus died on a stake, rather than a cross
-Jesus was God's son, inferior to God Himself
-Holy Spirit is not God
-Blood transfusions are not allowed, because blood is the residence of the spirit
-The Bible must be read in concert with the Watchtower publications
-Those who oppose, defy, anger, or reject the authority of the organization are excommunicated and family members must cease all relations (with the exception of marriage, wherein the excommunicant is required to fulfill his or her 'marital duties', but no other relationship is allowed)
-Excommunicants are not permitted to interact with JWs
-Excommunication is called 'disfellowshipping'
-Speaking with an excommunicant can result in 'disfellowshipping'
-So can having a birthday party
-So can having a Christmas tree
-So can observing any holiday
-Worship occurs in a place called a 'Kingdom Hall'
-Jehovah is not the God of the Bible, but a caricature created by Charles Taze Russell and his disciples... so no, they do not worship the same God that we do.
-Membership is claimed to exceed 5 million worldwide

joelsdad

04-30-2003, 08:27 PM

On another note, i met a Jehovah's Witness today.

"Counter" to John 1:1 retranslation:
They didn't have an article. You wouldn't say, "i saw car," but, instead, "i saw A car."

Of course, Greek HAS articles, and there is not an article used in this case

This is incorrect. The Greek has the definite article the (hos) but it has no indefinite article for a or an--these are supplied by translation. But that is besides the min issue. I did not read all the thread so I hope I am not repepating what someone else has written.

I spent five years dealing actively with the JW's. I was kicked oout of their coinventions for stirring up trouble, banned from their kingdom halls for causing dissension and strirring doubt and for being able to use theoir literature better than they could.

The best way to reach a witness is not by going after blood, or pledges or holidays or the new world mistranslation or even the deity of Christ--go after the most important issue that keeps them from salvation. The fact that they do not beleive that jesus rose physically from the dead is the one issue that they fear most. You can even use their mistranslation to show them that Jesus did rise from the dead. Do a greek word study with them on the word resurrection (anastasia) and show them.[

Remember the gospel of our salvation is the belief in the death burial and physical resurrection of Jesus for our sins. Beleive it or not they can get saved without accepting the deity of Jesus. Nowhere in Scripture does it say that beleif in the deity of Christ is prerequisite for Salvation. Once they do accept the physical resurrection of Christ and are born again then the Holy Spirit will be able to remove the blinders of the false religion they have been in bondage to and show them the truth about the deity of Jesus and all the rest of the crap that the watchtower has deceived them.

BTW-- another great tip if you don't already know-- seperater them from the Watchtower when sharing with them. It helps keep them from getting to defensive. Example: Thee Watchtower teaches tha Jesus did not physically roise from the dead in the same body He went to the grave with, bu the Bible clearly teaches that He did--which will you beleive- an organization or Gods inspired Word! By framing your approach like this instead of saying stuff like : "Well I know you believe",

You put a gap between them and the false doctrine and allow them a space to ponder. Hope this helps. Dealing with JW's is real tough. Lots of planting and weeding and watering, and most time very little harvesting.

notmyown

04-30-2003, 09:10 PM

joelsdad

05-01-2003, 03:29 PM

Careful, though. The Jehovah's Witnesses are taught to believe that the Watchtower is their only guide to understanding the Bible. They are also taught not to question the Watchtower. When it comes to this, be sure you get a copy of their New World Translation so you can see their [modified] Bible.

I agree, the best way to counter the Jw's is first to make sure you are grounded in the Word, then pore over their material so that you can understand their thought processes. The Watchtower Society is to a JW what the Pope is to a Catholic, which is why you need to deal with them and start putting a wedge between them and the Watchtower. their thinking has been subverted by the orgasnization, and when you can seperate them from the Society ( As I stated esarlier Instead of going after them for what they beleive, simply state that the Organization teaches this, while the Bible says this, which do we wish to believe??)
It is very very difficult in working with JW's. You need firmness but yet patiernce and deep deep understanding. Getting them saved is the main issue. forget birthdays and holidays and blood and government and all of the rest of the inconsequential issues, stick with the resurrection.

It is interesting in that the Watchtoweer is partially correct in assailing the celebration of holidays. Christmas, Easter, Valentines day, almost all the trappings originate in pagan customs and originally were associated with worship ofidols. But I knowe some very precious saints of God who do not celebrate Christmas for that very reason. they have the biblical liberty to not celebrate if they choose, just as others have the liberty to celebrate. All these are smoke screen issues anyway.

the best way to deal with them is to use their own onfo against them and show them how the watchtower isa wrong and the resurrection is true. Even their own bible shows the physical resurrection of Jesus.

dlbfleming

05-14-2003, 06:25 PM

haven't read all the posts, but wanted to let you know that it IS a different bible...they, for the most part, are the same as others, but with a few KEY changes that screw with the meaning...but if you ever sit down and talk to them, they will give you verses to look up in YOUR bible, and read with them, trying to make you think that they are the same, but they are not.

notmyown

05-14-2003, 09:04 PM

no NWT for me!

joelsdad

05-15-2003, 05:28 PM

no NWT for me!

I agree, but to be more effective, learn how to use it. For with the editors notes and the verses they haven't twisted to their own destruction, you can go far in undermioning a JW's beleif in the Watchtower as the sole source of communication between God and man. With that, half the battle is won.

notmyown

05-15-2003, 07:24 PM

Joelsdad: Were you a Jehovah's Witness at one point? Or did you go in solely to witness?

What would you say is the single most effective argument for true Christianity, aside from the best witness: our actions as we've been transformed by Jesus?

ICTHUS

05-31-2003, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by tropicana
"the life is in the blood".

Actually, thats one thing they ARE right about (I'm not a Jehovah's Witness, for the record) but its a little extreme not to get a blood transfusion because of this theological understanding. I dont think God's going to punish you for it..He's got other things on His mind, like DRAWING SOULS TO HIS ONLY SON!!

The ancient Jewish understanding of Body and Blood was that the blood contained the life's essence of a person, and the body contained the soul..

This is why Catholics (I'm Catholic) believe that the Holy Eucharist is really and truly Jesus under the forms of bread and wine.

Read John 6:48-68

Jesus says that His flesh is real food, and His blood is real drink. Therefore, if the real drink and the real food are Jesus Precious Blood, and His Divine Body, then the Blood contains His life, and the Body contains His Soul and Divinity.

So in a way, the JW's arent far off in that respect. (In all fairness). The Blood DOES contain the life of a person. Do I think that if one has a blood transfusion, that one recieves the life of another person? Quite possibly. Its an interesting question to ponder...but in a matter of life and death, I'd rather have the blood transfusion and think things over later!

God bless,
Ryan

ICTHUS

05-31-2003, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by joelsdad

The Watchtower Society is to a JW what the Pope is to a Catholic, which is why you need to deal with them and start putting a wedge between them and the Watchtower.

Joelsdad, while I agree with you insofar as you say the Watchtower is a cult, you misundertand what the Pope is to Catholics. I am offended that you would even make that comparison.

Peter, according to Matthew 16:18 is the rock upon which Christ built His Church. As such, he had the authority to bind and to loose in heaven and on Earth. His successors (the Popes) have the same authority, and it comes from Christ.

The "authority" of the Watchtower comes from a spirit of CONTROL which is not of God - it is of Satan.

Also, I have seriously questioned the teachings of the Church before, and it was taken in step by my pastor, who quietly and calmly answered my questions, and I understood what he said, he didn't just say "Its right because the Pope says its right" which is what a JW would say about the watchtower. A Jehovahs Witness who did that would be disfellowshipped immediately. How DARE YOU to compare the two??

I'm an aspiring Catholic apologist, and if you want to take it to private messages I can give you some information on the legitimate authority of the Successors of Peter. Its dismaying that youre trying to incite people on these boards to a hatred of the Catholic Church.

May God take the horse blinders off you...

God bless,
Ryan

Imrocking

05-31-2003, 11:25 PM

Originally posted by notmyown
Next time a JW comes to your door, ask for some literature.

Don't buy literature! I am not sure where I read this, but it was clear that if you buy literature, you do more than you realize. As I understand it, they will always come back to your house, thinking that they planted a seed and that it needs watering. Instead look them up on the web. My friend and i are doing a study on Jehovah's Witnesses for Sunday School, and that is what we did. Also, have your Bible handy. The way the go about it, they sound awful convincing, but remember they TAKE THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT. This point is very important.

I also incourage everyone who is really interested to go buy some books. J.W.s are in a cult, and cults are scary. We need to know how to go about talking to them.

Good luck all!!

Nikki:)

notmyown

06-01-2003, 03:38 PM

You're right of course. I have some qualms about transubstantiation (literal changing from body to bread, blood to wine), but your point is clear and transubstantiation is not worth arguing about - we'll find out for sure when we get to heaven, one way or another.

So sure, I can definitely agree that they aren't too far off, but they take it way far out to an extreme. If a person recieves a blood transfusion, they are often shunned or 'disfellowshipped.' There have been many cases when they have even kidnapped JW's from the hospital to prevent emergency procedures such as these.

Does the blood contain the essence of a person's life? Probably. But, like ICTHUS, i'm going to get a transfusion if I need it.

Assofar as the pope is concerned, he's an important leader. Just make sure to be like ICTHUS and not accept without question doctrines from a human source. The pope is a human too, but his authority in the church hierarchy is real. He was placed there by God.

And please don't be like Bob Jones University - don't call the pope 'demon posessed!'

BTW, I'm not a Catholic, and I don't try to be wishy-washy. ICTHUS obviously takes his faith seriously, and Protestants (such as myself) need to remember sometimes that Catholics aren't nonChristians - just like Protestants, some are for real, some are not.

joelsdad

06-01-2003, 04:52 PM

A Jehovahs Witness who did that would be disfellowshipped immediately. How DARE YOU to compare the two??

There was no attempt to say the Catholic Church is the same as the Watchtower. I do apologize that I made it appear so. I was just trying to say that the Pope is the head of the Catholic
church (ON EARTH) AND NO CATHOLIC DOCTRINE CAN BE PROMULGATED WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE pOPE. When a pope speaks ex-cathedra, then according to church teaching there can be no argument or disagreement from that teaching under the pain of excommunication. It is the sense of authority that is common knowledge. While most Catholiocs now do not follow lock step, it was vastly different when I was young and a Cathoilic.

Joelsdad: Were you a Jehovah's Witness at one point? Or did you go in solely to witness?

Nope, never had the curse of being a JW. I did spend five years researching their materials and actively pursuing them in their conventions, kingdom halls, and streets while they were passing out their trash.

The best method in dealing with them is always the truth. As Jesus said in the gospel of John "you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." And Paul in Romans said "Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word." \

In a short term or one or two shot encounter I have found it best to hammer away at the physical resurrection of Jesus. They deny the physical ressurection which makes them unsaved as Paul taugtht in 1 Corinthians.

If you have the opportunity to spend time with one on a regular basis, pick up a copy of theior New World Mistranslation (oops) Translation LOL, a copy of the book reqasonings from the Scripture and begin to get intot he mindset of the JW's. By seeig these things you will see the subtle and not so subtle mind control the watrchtower exerts on their followers.

Forget the holidays, birthdays, blood transfusions, flags, pledges and all the rest. Don't even start on the deity of Jesus and the personality of the Holy Spirit, they are nuclear loaded here and it would be trying to undermine the Hoover Dam with a plastic spoon. Stick to the resurrection. The object is not to win arguments but to rescue souls from the lake of fire.

When talking to them always seperate them from the organization. Do not use phrases like "I know YOU believe..." But instead phrase it in a manner like this: The Watrchtower teaches this, but the Bible says this, shouldn't we believe Gods inspired Word over any organization???

If they persist in the belief that their org is the sole source of communication between God and man and the Bible can only be understood by the organization---- Respond in such a manner; "But isn't it also true that there have been several organizations within Christendom that claimed to be the sole source of communication and tyhey also taught that they alone as the org had the rightr to interpret the Bible fopr the people. They were wrong but what makes the Watchtower righjt????

Then be patient. If you have the privilege of leading a Witness to Christ just know that many many hiours and much investment by other beleivers before you paved the way. Others planted and waterd, butr it was God who allowed you to see theharvest.

Hopes thiss helps. Will be glad to answer any other questions if I may. Walter Martins book is good. Another excellent book is"Crisis of Conscience" by J. Franz who was the brother of one of the former presidents of the Watchtower and left/was disfellowshipped for the truth/

PunkRawkGuy

06-01-2003, 09:48 PM

So if I'm straying off topic, but there's a similar thread going on over at the Seymour Duncan Forum (guitar pickups) off-topic area:
http://www.seymourduncan.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=3;action=display;num=1051376736
If any of you guys want to jump in and help out, it's a good witnessing opportunity.
Will

Wally

06-02-2003, 03:18 PM

icthus: Peter, according to Matthew 16:18 is the rock upon which Christ built His Church. As such, he had the authority to bind and to loose in heaven and on Earth. His successors (the Popes) have the same authority, and it comes from Christ.

me: actually, thats not true. Superman crushed that idea quite a while ago, wish i knew where it was at but a close look at the greek and actual events in the Bible show that Peter was not the same rock mentioned when talking about building the church upon a rock.

icthus: Its dismaying that youre trying to incite people on these boards to a hatred of the Catholic Church.

me: trust me, no one here is trying to get anyone to hate the Catholic Church. don't get all uptight so fast, could lead to a heart attack one day.

icthus: May God take the horse blinders off you...

me: the same could be said about you and Catholicism

Mike Graham

06-02-2003, 06:07 PM

As to the issue of Peter not being the rock refered to:

Jesus says that His disciple shall be known as petroV, meaning "pebble" or "little rock." He then says that on th petra, THIS [normal sized] rock, He will build His church. The point is that He is distinguishing between Peter and that which His church (this rock, changing attention) is built on- Himself (Our Rock, our Foundation, the Cornerstone, the Stone which the builders rejected.) Peter is a litte-rock, or little-Christ. A Christian.

Even if this passage was refering to what you purport, I still personally see no precedent for papal ascention.

notmyown

06-02-2003, 07:21 PM

well let's not crucify our catholic friends here - I do understand what you're saying and wholeheartedly agree gettheedge.

I just want to make sure we understand that (and some of us may groan and say, it's the Bill Clinton of Catholicism) we understand that we should respect the pope as an authority, even if we don't respect him as a religious leader.

ICTHUS

06-03-2003, 03:11 AM

QUOTE]Originally posted by gethedge
As to the issue of Peter not being the rock refered to:

Jesus says that His disciple shall be known as petroV, meaning "pebble" or "little rock." He then says that on th petra, THIS [normal sized] rock, He will build His church. The point is that He is distinguishing between Peter and that which His church (this rock, changing attention) is built on- Himself (Our Rock, our Foundation, the Cornerstone, the Stone which the builders rejected.) Peter is a litte-rock, or little-Christ. A Christian.

Even if this passage was refering to what you purport, I still personally see no precedent for papal ascention. [/QUOTE]

First, let me point out that the word petros and petra were synonyms in First Century greek. They meant "small stone" and "large rock" in some early Greek poetry before the time of Christ, but that distinction had all but disappeared by the time Matthews Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in meaning can be found in Attic Greek, but not in Koine Greek, (the dialect which the Gospel of Matthew was written in). In Koine Greek, both petros and petra simply meant "rock." If Jesus had wanted to call Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used. The missionary’s argument didn’t work and showed a faulty knowledge of Greek. (For an Evangelical Protestant Greek scholar’s admission of this, see D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., 8:368).

But theres more...we must go to from the Greek, to the Aramaic.
The Gospel of Matthew was ORIGINALLY written in Aramaic, but because Greek was the common language of the meditteranean world, the Gospel of Matthew was translated into Greek. Today, sadly, we have no copies of the original Aramaic of the Gospel of Matthew.

Four times in Galatians and four times in 1 Corinthians, St. Paul refers to St. Peter by his Aramaic title, Kephas.

Now, we must then understand what the word Kepha means in Aramaic. It means a LARGE ROCK (as in a boulder). If Jesus wanted to call Peter a little rock, he would have used the Aramaic word "evna". And we see that this is not the case, since the word "Kephas" (or Cephas, its the same word, just a different transliteration from the Aramaic) appears several times throughout the New Testament.

So, what Jesus was really saying was "Blessed are you, Simon son of John, for man has not revealed this to you, but the Spirit of God. And you shall be Kepha (Peter) (big rock) and on this Kepha I will build My Church, and the gates of Hell shall never prevail against it"

You might ask, then, if Peter was not to be addressed as the Rock upon which Jesus built His Church, did he not use the word "Petra" (which means a big rock, in the strictest sense of Greek) rather than the word "Petros" which means a little rock...

The answer is: because Matthew HAD NO CHOICE. Aramaic and Greek nouns take different gender endings...

In Matthew 16:18 in Aramaic, you can use the word "Kepha" in both places with no problem. However, you run into serious problems in Greek because Greek nouns take masculine, feminine, and neuter gender endings..

The Greek word "petra" (which means a large rock, a boulder, as I've said already) is feminine. You can use it for the second half of Matthew 16:18 with no problem, BUT, for the first part of the verse, where Christ gives St. Peter his new name, you cannot give a man a feminine name (thus, you can't name a man "Petra") at least back then you couldnt.

So, in the translation from Aramaic to Greek, some of the play on Words has been lost.

Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatum from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Is. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.

(I relied heavily on http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_the_Rock.asp for this apology, as I am by no means a Greek scholar)

well let's not crucify our catholic friends here

Well, how about you not assume we're right before you have all the facts, otherwise, you might up getting "crucified" yourself, (as I just demonstrated) hmmm?

God bless,
ICTHUS

Never assume that a Catholic is ignorant of their faith. You might just end up getting burned.

Wally

06-03-2003, 12:53 PM

i remember one of the key points superman made about the greek was that even if someone wanted to claim that the two words, petra and petros, were the same (and i'm not willing to give in to that really) that the the definite article before the reference towards the rock of the church clearly seperated the two.

and EVEN if peter did have the "papal" authority which you guys claim (which i'm not willing to give that either), showing that it is a title/position that is passed down to another is gonna be a tough one.

joelsdad

06-03-2003, 02:29 PM

Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.

Unfortunately this statment is less than accurate. What was considered the only reliable record for the line of Popes from Peter to Constantine was a document called the donation of Constantine, which was admitted to be a fraud by the Jesuits themselves. There was no Pope between peter and Constantine.

notmyown

06-03-2003, 03:33 PM

If you guys really want to continue this debate over the papacy, why don't you continue it in a new thread? here's one at http://www.christianguitar.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52644 . I started it. Use it.

ICTHUS

06-03-2003, 08:39 PM

Originally posted by joelsdad
Unfortunately this statment is less than accurate. What was considered the only reliable record for the line of Popes from Peter to Constantine was a document called the donation of Constantine, which was admitted to be a fraud by the Jesuits themselves. There was no Pope between peter and Constantine.

Why would the Jesuits admit they frauded something?

Oh WAIT. You must have the Society of Jesus (Jesuits) mixed up with the lies and deciet of Jack Chick!!!

ICTHUS

06-03-2003, 08:54 PM

notmyown

06-03-2003, 08:57 PM

ICTHUS, better post it to the thread I linked to, we're trying to keep the papacy thing over there. Just to make sure everyone gets your side of the debate. It's beginning to look a little one-sided without you.

MusicalDragon84

06-03-2003, 09:01 PM

I had a best friends that was a J.W. and I got a chance to look at her Bible. The first verse I looked at was John 1:1. Their bible says "In the beginning was the word. And the word was with god and the word was A god!

It's almost identical to the Mormons version of that verse. the captialization is different and so is the meaning to them.

I don't know what to tell you about JWs but I'm willing to tell you all I know about them. I was best friends with her and her family for 3 years.

ICTHUS

06-03-2003, 09:03 PM

Originally posted by ICTHUS
Well, I'll be befuddled...the Catholic Encyclopaedia admits it was a forgery. I'll have to research this one. This isin't an admission of defeat, its an admission that there is a gap in my knowledge that I need to fill.

God bless,
ICTHUS

Note to self: there is a biography of the unbroken succession of Popes, written by St. Jerome as far as Pope St. Damasus I, and then carried on by someone else.

It's called the Liber Pontificalis "Book of the Popes"

notmyown

06-03-2003, 09:19 PM

Bye ICTHUS... we're getting back to Jehovah's Witnesses. It is odd, isn't it, how the New World Translation (the Jehovah's Witnesses translation) of the bible is more suited to their doctrines than their doctrines are suited to it. They adjusted the Bible to agree with their doctrines, instead of vice versa.

joelsdad

06-04-2003, 04:26 PM

Well, I'll be befuddled...the Catholic Encyclopaedia admits it was a forgery. I'll have to research this one. This isin't an admission of defeat, its an admission that there is a gap in my knowledge that I need to fill.

Thanks I will acceptr that as an apology for thinking I would base any staement on the nut case Chick. I met Father Rivera (four of Chicks comics are bvased on Him) and that man is a bitter ex priest. If he had come to know Christ he would be rerjoicing. Chick tracts are entertaining, but I do not use many for passing out to unsaved--Too radical for evangelism.

It's called the Liber Pontificalis "Book of the Popes"

Please don't be dismayed if it is based on the documernts that form the Donation of Constantine(these were around for ahile)

xSuspensionx

06-19-2003, 08:20 AM

jesus is not god: they said he was michael the archangel. He did not raise form the dead, but according to them, returned to earth 1914 INVISIBLY.(lol all day long)

No, really, he did come back. I can see invisible people.

Mike Graham

06-19-2003, 12:08 PM

Actually, a JW I have been witnessing to for a long time informed me one day that she did not affirm this belief.

tropicana

07-02-2003, 11:11 AM

The translation to use when witnessing to a Jehovah's Witness is the (normal) KJV. Their organisation prints these to make money on the side.

ezekiel267

07-13-2003, 05:47 PM

ive been arguing a LOT with my JW friend, and I'm a bit too lazy to read every single comment, so ill briefly state some facts, and a few more later.
from what i learned from my friend, they believe the Holy Spirit is the power of God, and not an actual person, like Jesus or the Father. However, throughout New Testament, the Holy Spirit can be grieved, be lied to, even be spoken to. Even in the OT, David asks how he could hide from the Spirit...and goes on to hint that the Spirit is omnipotent, like God himself.
They also believe that the Lord Jesus Christ, like i've seen many other posts say that he is a god. They also do not believe in the Christian Trinity, saying that it presents polytheism. But of course, we know that the Trinity represents a unity, that the three equal God--like a three-legged footstool. However, believing that Jesus is a god, provides clear evidence that Jesus and the Father are in fact separate from each other, showing polytheism. So basically, they are the polytheists.
their name in itself is a true mistranslation. the Hebrew scriptures read YHWH as the Lord's name, but the Jews, when they were writing, said that the name of the LORD is too great and it shows disrespect to God by saying his name.
What a Christian should say to one is your decision. Use the Bible. In the KJV (which has numerous mistranslations, and isn't used as much anymore) I John 5:7, it says that the Father, Son, and the Spirit are in agreement, showing the Trinity. However, other scriptures do not say that because the English manuscripts were written like that...not the original ones.

I will write more...I love these topics ;)

notmyown

07-14-2003, 10:05 AM

Unfortunately, I'm afraid I John 5:7 might not work on a JW.
In the New World Translation (henceforth NWT), I John 5:7-8 reads "For there are three witness bearers, the spirit and the water and the blood, and the three are in agreement." They might not take to a non-Watchtower interpretation of that.
While John 1:1 NWT reads "In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god," nearly any other verse you can think of that points to the divinity of Jesus is clear and undiluted in the NWT. Give me an example and I'll post it (I can't think of any good ones off the top of my head - what can I say; it's the morning). I know John 17:5 NWT: "So now you, Father, glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was."
Also, the whole works-based salvation thing ("working the doors"): Ephesians 2:8-9 NWT is quite clear: "By this undeserved kindness, indeed, YOU have been saved through faith; and this not owing to YOU, it is God's gift. No, it is not owing to works, in order that no man should have ground for boasting."
Once again, it's morning-time, so I can't think of a good proof text for the trinity off the top of my head - here is a text that points to it, however. 2 Corinthians 13:14 NWT: "The undeserved kindness of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the sharing in the holy spirit be with all of You."
ALSO, I know that, in the Greek, 'spirit' is usually a gender neutral term. Like in English, Greek has three third person singular pronouns; for the masculine, femine, and neutral (or 'neuter' - seriously). In the book of John, in chapter 14 when Jesus is talking about the Holy Spirit, He uses the masculine pronoun. The NWT tries to mask this in verse 26: "But the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach YOU all things and bring back to YOUR minds all the things I told YOU." The NASB words it differently: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your rememberance all that I said to you." (NASB)

Notice the NASB's use of 'whom' and 'He' instead of 'which' and 'the one.' That's an obvious attempt to mask the person of the Holy Spirit.

Anyway, try to find out if a local library has a copy of the NWT, and check it out if you can. It's a great thing to be able to glance at.

Scripture marked 'NASB' taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE(r), Copyright (c) 1960,1962,1963,1968,1971,1972,1973,1975,1977,1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.

ezekiel267

07-14-2003, 08:03 PM

yeah, i know what you mean...
many people i've asked in person just say that JW's are a joke...
but they believe Jesus is an archangel, right? (according to watchtower)
but we, in our spiritual forms, are higher than angels, because angels arent considered God's children. however, throughout the NT, Jesus is called the Son of God...
i dont know, there are various ways of proving JW's wrong...but they just refuse to see the truth...so committed...

boogeray

07-31-2003, 08:48 PM

i had some JW come to the house yesterday morning ... they were here about a month ago & left some reading ...

we didn't get past the part where they don't think Jesus is God ... they don't think He is an angel either, they think He is God's first creation, His only begotten son ... i have delt with these folks several times in the past & they kinda freak out when they are invited into a home, cuz the average christians are scared to debate with them ... the average christian don't know the bible well enough to hang

anyway i let this lady know that i already knew most of what we would disagree on & that i knew she would not convince me of any doctrine she could present

i went straight to the fact that Jesus is God & explained the "begotten" part(that they rely heaveyly on) as just talking about Jesus being born as a human ... i then had them turn to Phil 2

Philippians 2
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

i was after the part about Jesus being equal to God but when i read on down to the part about every knee shall bow & every tounge shall confess that Jesus is Lord ... Bingo!!!!! ... i knew i had'um

now you got to understand how careful they are about Jehova God & how they are a stickler for making sure they stay away from idolitry, to the point that they refuse to pledge alledgence to the flag or country or anything else ... they really concentrate on how Jealous God is ... so when i told them if Jesus wasn't God how could we bow & worship Him? ... if the jealous God they preach (BTW i believe God is a jealous God myself) hated idolitry how could He promote it by making every knee bow in worship to Jesus & proclaim Him as Lord ... If Jesus "is not" God then God is promoteing idolitry Himself

they suddenly remembered that they left their vehicle running with somebody sitting in it & they needed to leave :)

ezekiel267

08-01-2003, 11:38 AM

i find that a bit odd...JW's usually work in groups of two or more with different strengths on the Bible.

boogeray

08-01-2003, 11:47 AM

yeah this woman had her brother with her & i don't know who was in the car

i have been talking to JW for years and do not remember them ever saying they thought Jesus was an angel

ezekiel267

08-02-2003, 12:28 AM

oh...and i dont know what kind of JWs you've been working with, but they believe that Jesus is the archangel...aka Michael

this is the official site of JW's: http://www.watchtower.org/library/w/1995/11/1/the_truth_about_angels.htm (read box where it says "WHO ARE THE ANGELS?")
http://www.lamed.org/jw.htm
http://members.tripod.com/crossbearer-brian/id101.htm

i think that's more than what you need

ezekiel267

08-30-2003, 10:46 PM

i do a bunch of essays...i dug one up on jw's...if any of you guys are interested..
To start off with this section of the research, I will be starting off with a quote from their version of the Bible (NWT), "...when the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak. With presumptuousness the prophet spoke it. You must not get frightened at him." - Deuteronomy 18:22. When I quoted this verse to a friend, he claimed that Watchtower never claimed to be the prophet of God. It is easy to prove this. In a publication dated back in 1972 on the first of April, the 197th page of Watchtower says: ""So does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come? These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet?...This "prophet" was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah's Christian Witnesses...Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a Prophet of God. It is another thing to prove it."
In addition to the previous false prophecies I have given you, there are much more.
In 1918, Watchtower began to tell all Witnesses to expect something in 1925. In 1918, Watchtower publishes an article called, "Millions Now Living Will Never Die" and on page 89, they say, "Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the Apostle in Hebrews 11, to the condition of human perfection." Another publication states, "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914." The Watchtower 9/1/22, page 262. The following year, 1925's anticipation grows: "Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge." The Watchtower, page 106 4/1/23. On New Years' Day, Watchtower claims this, "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year." The Watchtower, 1/1/25, page. 3. In the same year, "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year." The Watchtower, 1/1/25, page. 3.
And as we all know, none of this happened. Watchtower, as in previous false prophecies, had an excuse ready: 1926 "Some anticipated that the work would end in 1925, but the Lord did not state so. The difficulty was that the friends inflated their imaginations beyond reason; and that when their imaginations burst asunder, they were inclined to throw away everything." The Watchtower, page 232. Five years later, Watchtower said this, "There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah's faithful ones on earth concerning the years 1917, 1918, and 1925, which disappointment lasted for a time...and they also learned to quit fixing dates." Vindication, page 338.
Was this it? No! During the establishment of this Society, in 1899, Watchtower said, "...the Battle of the great day of God Almighty' (Revelation 16:14), which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth's present rulership, is already commenced." The Time Is at Hand, page 101 (1908 edition).
John, who received a vision from God said in Revelation 1:7 it says "Behold, He cometh with the clouds; and every eye shall see Him...". But the leaders of the Watchtower cult say He came invisibly in 1914 and was not seen with literal eyes but with the eyes of understanding by the Watchtower bosses only. Again, 1 Cor. 15:50 says "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit Ihe Kingdom of God; neither does corruption inherit incorruption". But the Wachtower Cult teaches that the great crowd of the Witnesses will live forever with bodies of flesh and blood on the earth. They also teach that the New Heaven and the New Earth of Rev. 21:1 does not mean what it says, it is to be understood spiritually. Now you tell me, who will you believe? An organization who came from the blur by one who barely knew the Scriptures and prophesized only the false, or a man whom Jesus Christ himself entrusted the care of his mother to and an apostle, who was the first generation of the early church?
Jesus warned us. He knew this would come, because he said in the NIV version, "For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect -- if that were possible" (Matt. 24:24)...even in the NW Translation: "For false Christs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones."
One Jehovah's Witness claimed that they were predictions and not prophecies. Does that make a difference? They were so confident in this happening, and wrote it all over their magazines and publications. He responded that they don't always have to be correct because they were just predictions...prophecies mean that God had spoke to them and told them the date. But how and why would God tell, when it says that Jesus would "come like a thief"? The Son does not know when the day will come, how will the Watchtower know? Even in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4, Paul says that whoever prophecies or attempts to figure out the coming of Christ is full of lawlessness. In verse 3, he stresses that the day would not come, until those men are stripped and exposed to the truth...and you'd think that JW's read the Bible all the time...

ezekiel267

08-30-2003, 10:47 PM

Jehovah's Witnesses claim that God is just a mere title and that his real and only name is Jehovah. Why do we not call him Jehovah? Does it not say in King James Version, the first version ever to be translated in English because England would not allow it, that the Lord's name is pronounced Jehovah? Why don't any of our Bibles say Jehovah in them, besides the KJV and the NWT? Why don't we call God Jehovah?
According to the custom of many Jews, the name of GOD was too holy to either write or speak in everyday use. This notion was extrapolated from Deu 5:11, which says we should not take GOD's name in vain. GOD, however, left it up to man to decide what was "in vain". Jews and Christians during the last 2000 years or so decided to be very conservative in this, and decided that GOD's name should only be used by specific authorities (priests, official scripture readers, etc.) and on special occasions.
As a result, Jewish people usually substitute the phrase "Ha Shem" (meaning, "The Name"), "God", or "Lord", when speaking the name. Similarly, when many of the English translations of the Old Testament were printed, the editors usually substituted the words "GOD", "LORD" or "The LORD", for GOD's actual name. To distinguish this from the title, "God"/"gods" (which is the Hebrew word, "Elohim"), "GOD" and "LORD" are usually printed in capital letters.
So what about Jehovah? The KJ Version does claim that the Lord's name is Jehovah in Psalms 83. This is wrong--as cliche as it may sound--this translation is wrong. Jehovah's Witnesses took from the King James Version, but not the original Hebrew/Greek manuscripts. They trusted and relied more on the text of KJV and never looked at the original manuscripts. William Tyndale, the one who was persecuted and killed for illegally translating and making the Bible available in English, was trusted more than the firsthand accounts of the prophets of God. They believed every single translation was correct and precise. The Hebrew manuscripts weren't written with vowels, thus translators had to put the vowels back in wherever it would make sense. The word for word translation of God's name as mentioned in the Bible is YHWH.
This Christian spelling and pronunciation came about in past centuries when the letter 'J' actually sounded like the modern 'Y', and the letter 'V' sounded like the modern 'U' or 'W'. Since this is no longer true, this is one reason why this spelling really should not be used. Furthermore, the spelling, 'Jehovah' (sometimes 'Jahovah'), does not use the correct vowels. Christian scholars deliberately chose to use the vowels 'a' and 'o' associated with the Hebrew word, "adonay" (Hebrew for "master").
Here is a letter from an ex-Jehovah Witness, who sent one to a Catholic friend of mine--Michael Reider: 
Hi Michael
The question you ask is a good question, and has a lengthy answer. However I will try and be concise and to the point. 
1) The original language of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew. up until the 4th century the Hebrew language had no vowels, only consonants. So even today if you were to loon at a Hebrew Bible you would see God's name written out in 4 consonants (I am not able to write those Hebrew letter as my computer does not have that capability) in English they are YHWH . 
These 4 letters do appear in the old manuscript. But because the Jews did not want to say God's name in vain they stopped saying it and replaced it with Lord. 
The name was said by the High priest only once when he entered the Most Holy once a year. 
The 4 consonants are usually referred to as the TETRAGRAMMATON meaning 4 letters. 
Remember in Hebrew all names have meaning. When Moses in Exodus 3:13b asked God "what is His name? what shall I say to them? God said to Moses (vs14) I AM WHO I AM" thus you shall say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent me to you. 
Now how did YHWH become Jehovah 
During the German Reformation (around 1620) a colleague of Martin Luther began using the divine name in his German writing. He took the vowels from the word Adonay (meaning LORD) which the Hebrew had substituted for YAHWEH and inserted them between the consonants. YaHoVaH. 
Since in German the Y sound is written as a J they spelled the divine name Jehovah 
There is no such name. and even the Watchtower has admitted that the better translation would be Yehwah or Yahweh. 
That is a short explanation of how the name Jehovah was fabricated. God preserved His word we are sure that he would have preserved the correct pronunciation of His name also. 
The name Jehovah does not appear anywhere in the New Testament and yet they have interpolated (introduced) it in over 237 times.

ezekiel267

08-30-2003, 10:48 PM

What was Jesus crucified on? If one who was asked this question was a JW, he would firmly reply a stake. If one who was asked this question was a Christian, he would firmly reply a cross. But where was Jesus really crucified?
When I came across this topic with a JW friend, he gave me information on it. I could not back myself up, so I only replied that it doesn't really matter if He died on a cross or a stake, what matters is the reason why he had to die--to forgive our sins, so that we could be admitted into the Kingdom of God (though the Watchtower does not believe that all will go to heaven, which I will explain later.)
In support of their position, they accurately state that the Greek word used in many Bibles which is translated into "cross" is the Greek word "stauros" which means, "an upright stake, esp. a pointed one, a cross."
If a stake were used, instead of a cross, then Jesus' hands would have been placed above His head with a nail driven through His wrists. Since the wrists would most likely overlap, only one nail is needed through both wrists. However, some Jehovah's Witnesses have maintained that Jesus' hands may have been placed one higher than another on the stake, they say this because, "The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." (John 20:25). Notice the plural of nail in that passage.
But attacking this, doctors admit that you would have to be under a lot of pressure of your upper body in order for water to come out. If this is true, the cross makes even more sense. Jesus was hung by nails on his hands, which would cause him to be under pressure by being pulled down, and being forced to keep his arms and hands in that position. Try it yourself. You can feel the difference. But the stake, all pressure is focused to one point, allowing you to breathe easier, and having a bit less pressure.

ezekiel267

08-30-2003, 10:52 PM

Jehovah Witnesses do not believe in physical resurrection of Christ. They believe his spirit ascended only.
In John 2:19-20, Jesus said, "'Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.' The Jews therefore said, 'It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?' But He was speaking of the temple of his body." Read that and think about it for a while. Does that not tell you that Jesus prophecised his resurrection of his physical body? The Bible clearly states this. What we, Christians, believe is that Jesus's physical body is really up there, in heaven. If you read the last parts of John, you can read about how Jesus let Thomas reach his hand on his side, his hands.
Some scholars think that when Jesus appeared to the disciples on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24:13-35, that the reason they did not recognize Him was because Jesus had been beaten about the face and His beard had been ripped from His face and was simply not recognizable. It wasn't until after He broke bread and exposed His wrists that they then saw who He was. But, this is just a theory.
The physical resurrection of Jesus is a very important doctrine. 1 Cor. 15:14 says, "and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain." The reason it is so important is because Jesus?physical resurrection is the proof that death has been conquered and that we too will be physically resurrected. To say that Jesus did not rise from the dead is to say that death had victory over Him. If that were so, we would be without hope and sin would still have its power.
The other main Scripture passage that the Watchtower uses in an attempt to support their doctrine of Christ rising as a spirit creature is 1 Corninthians 15:44-46 which reads as follows in the New World Translation: "It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. It is even so written: " The first man Adam became a living soul." The last Adam became a life giving spirit. Nevertheless, the first is, not that which is spiritual, but that which is physical, afterward that which is spiritual." The whole point of 1 Corninthians 15:35-58 is that the natural body will be changed and raised up a powerful supernatural body. It is not as though what will be raised will be distinct from the physical body, rather, there will be a continuity. For example, verses 42-44 state how it (the body, not something else) will be raised up. It is sown a perishable, dishonorable, weak, and natural body. It (the same body) is raised up an imperishable, glorious, powerful, spiritual body. Verses 53-54 also states that the perishable mortal body will "put on" imperishability and immortality. By putting something on you are adding to what you already have.
It should also be pointed out that another popular objection that Jehovah’s Witnesses raise, when disputing the physical resurrection of Christ, is that they claim that Jesus simply manifested a physical looking body in the same way that angels did on some occasions: "Humans cannot see spirits, so the disciples evidently thought they were seeing an apparition or a vision (compare Mark 6:49, 50). Jesus assured them that he was no apparition; they could see his body of flesh and could touch him, feeling the bones; he also ate in their presence. Similarly, in the past, angels had materialized in order to be seen by men; they has eaten, and some had even married and fathered children (Gen. 6:4; 19:1-3)." (Reasoning From the Scriptures, pp. 334 -335). 
Here are just a few Biblical quotes you can read for yourselves: 
Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 
Luke 24:40 And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet. 
Luke 24:41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? 
Luke 24:42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 
Luke 24:43 And he took it, and did eat before them. 
Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 
 
John 20:27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. 
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. 
 
Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. 
 
1 Cor 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.